IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/hecopl/v9y2014i02p169-191_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Health care cost containment in Denmark and Norway: a question of relative professional status?

Author

Listed:
  • Andersen, Lotte B.

Abstract

The demand for publicly subsidised health care services is insatiable, but the costs can be contained in different ways: formal rules can limit access to and the number of subsidised services, demand and supply can be regulated through the price mechanism, the relevant profession can contain the costs through state-sanctioned self-regulation, and other professions can contain the costs (e.g. through referrals). The use of these cost containment measures varies between countries, depending on demand and supply factors, but the relative professional status of the health professions may help explain why different countries use cost containment measures differently for different services. This article compares cost containment measures in Denmark and Norway because these countries vary with regard to the professional status of the medical profession relative to other health care providers, while other relevant variables are approximately similar. The investigation is based on formal agreements and rules, historical documents, existing analyses and an analysis of 360 newspaper articles. It shows that high relative professional status seems to help professions to avoid user fees, steer clear of regulation from other professions and regulate the services produced by others. This implies that relative professional status should be taken into consideration in analyses of health care cost containment.

Suggested Citation

  • Andersen, Lotte B., 2014. "Health care cost containment in Denmark and Norway: a question of relative professional status?," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 169-191, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:hecopl:v:9:y:2014:i:02:p:169-191_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744133113000248/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:hecopl:v:9:y:2014:i:02:p:169-191_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/hep .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.